Hmm, I disagree that absolutely all unpopular messengers are safe. But if we talk about the Utopia p2p application - yes, this decentralized ecosystem does not require any personal data at all, as far as I know. Therefore, it can be considered safe.
1 Like
It is not really obscurity if the source code is available. I would say that its more security by rarity. The biggest platforms are usually the ones targeted by most attackers since the payoff succeeding is larger. Small platforms may not attract that much attention from attackers.
2 Likes
Yes, despite being closed source, I still think this app is worthy of user attention. The only disappointment is the lack of a mobile version, I hope the developers will think about it.
Wait a minute, are you discribing this https://utopia-ecosystem.com/ one right now? My colleague has been using some kind of utopia for a long time, and if everything fits together, then I will definitely install it for myself, too. So far, Iāve only heard good things about this app.
Matrix is still a cluster, and that is not referencing chatty, which is seeing some good improvements. I mean that the state of the Matrix protocol and development efforts is still just a mess, with a lot of outstanding issues, and funding issues.
Meanwhile, XMPP is going strong, and getting stronger with initiatives like Snikket helping to fix the remaining weakspots (which is really just a quality iOS client). XMPP is federated by default, very similar to your email address. It has robust validated e2e encryption (OMEMO), and it is lightweight to the max, which is a sign of competent design and development. It can do everything that Purism needs from Matrix as well.
I think it would make a lot of sense to focus efforts on XMPP instead of Matrix at this point.
7 Likes
So I have been running a synapse server for the past 2+ weeks, and walking back some of my comments above. I am not changing my mind that I think Matrix should have just worked to improve XMPP and turn it into everything, BUT it is awesome to see the progress that the matrix folks are making. All the stuff planned for Matrix 2.0 seems pretty awesome.
Also my own server is running great and handling things well. It is NO WHERE near as efficient as the Prosody server I am running as well, but I am content.
The Element X client is going to be pretty great as well.
Still love XMPP and think it would have made more sense, but really digging Matrix as well at the moment.
4 Likes
Just to say about matrix TOS
1 Like
If we compare to the service with closest features: 
Any other messenger has (as far as I know) not the same feature set with streaming desktop for example. Alone for that reason Iām happy that matrix exists, even if itās not perfect.
Edit:
Also seams that not every point is fair:
We may share your information when working with our suppliers in order to provide the Service.
That is something (if I understand correctly) that depends on different home servers that share data with other home servers of same chat room to enable communication and stability.
One thing that I like about XMPP, that is specific to the Android app, Conversations, is that it makes a local copy of all your conversations. This is good because if the server goes down, or is turned off, you still at least have a copy of all the stuff that is on your phone.
Other services, if you canāt log in, you canāt access the data.
3 Likes
As far as I know (also a point I edit in post above) of matrix is, that you have access to the files if 2 home servers are involved and one went down. Your local copy doesnāt help you with different devices. So matrix was designed with different devices in mind.
If we think bigger, we can create company networks with matrix and using more than 1 homeserver - if one goes down, other home servers will stay alive.
XMPP and matrix address the same problem in different ways with different pros and cons.
Sorry for double posting, but @Tonyp: Why is Tor Browser classified as āprivacy Cā (Firefox is B)? Just wanna say we should take this website with care.
TOR Browsers focus is anonymity not privacy, and while thereās overlap between the two, there are also differences.
Anonymity is a form of privacy and the ādifferencesā making TOR even better in terms of privacy, not worse. So it should minimum be in same class (B) as Firefox is or even better, but not worse.
I can tell you why itās worse on that page: there are only 3 arguments on that page. All 3 positive, no negative or something else. And because there is no data at all they marked it worse than it is.
I just wanted to say that this page provides good information, but you should always think about it what information makes sense an what does not.
I may have ātldrā but isnāt that site just about website services and their EULAs? As in, not the browsers or any software. Those should not be confused. For comparing browsers, Iād prefer https://privacytests.org/